Anonymous
12/28/2022 15:04
Subject: Re:Hannah Natanson at it again
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Her stories all have an angle from the far left, including this article. How about an article about the straight up pornography in Gender Queer? How would it compare to pornography books not allowed in school libraries?
It’s not “pornography”. Stop pushing lies.
It shows a man giving fellatio to another man. Is that no longer considered pornography?
It’s ok because it’s illustrated, not an actual picture. That makes it artsy and “challenging.” LOL.
In all seriousness I don’t have a huge problem with HS age kids and up reading those kind of graphic novels, but come on - they shouldn’t be offered in school libraries. When I was in HS we had to get parental permission to watch Schindler’s List in history class as 15/16 year olds because it was R rated, and yes there were parents who didn’t allow it and those kids had to do another project for the week.
1. You are referencing Gender Queer, not Lawn Boy. Lawn Boy is not a graphic novel.
2. Gender Queer does not show a man giving fellatio to another man.
I've read both. You clearly have not.
This is exactly why reporters like Hannah Natanson should be fired. People rely on reporters at news sources such as The Washington Post to report on news after doing their research. She always seems scant on details and clearly didn't read either book, which lead to widespread misinformation about the books.
The only one trafficking in misinformation is yourself about Gender Queer. Please cite that Gender Queer doesn't show that (we'll be waiting...forever).
Anonymous
12/27/2022 12:38
Subject: Re:Hannah Natanson at it again
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Her stories all have an angle from the far left, including this article. How about an article about the straight up pornography in Gender Queer? How would it compare to pornography books not allowed in school libraries?
It’s not “pornography”. Stop pushing lies.
It shows a man giving fellatio to another man. Is that no longer considered pornography?
It’s ok because it’s illustrated, not an actual picture. That makes it artsy and “challenging.” LOL.
In all seriousness I don’t have a huge problem with HS age kids and up reading those kind of graphic novels, but come on - they shouldn’t be offered in school libraries. When I was in HS we had to get parental permission to watch Schindler’s List in history class as 15/16 year olds because it was R rated, and yes there were parents who didn’t allow it and those kids had to do another project for the week.
1. You are referencing Gender Queer, not Lawn Boy. Lawn Boy is not a graphic novel.
2. Gender Queer does not show a man giving fellatio to another man.
I've read both. You clearly have not.
This is exactly why reporters like Hannah Natanson should be fired. People rely on reporters at news sources such as The Washington Post to report on news after doing their research. She always seems scant on details and clearly didn't read either book, which lead to widespread misinformation about the books.
Anonymous
12/27/2022 00:59
Subject: Re:Hannah Natanson at it again
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Her stories all have an angle from the far left, including this article. How about an article about the straight up pornography in Gender Queer? How would it compare to pornography books not allowed in school libraries?
It’s not “pornography”. Stop pushing lies.
It shows a man giving fellatio to another man. Is that no longer considered pornography?
No, that is most certainly NOT what it shows.
Stop lying.
Gender Queer shows 2 teenage males giving oral sex to each other. Go grab the book or just use Google.
Getting closer, but no. Still got it wrong.
Anonymous
12/26/2022 22:02
Subject: Re:Hannah Natanson at it again
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Her stories all have an angle from the far left, including this article. How about an article about the straight up pornography in Gender Queer? How would it compare to pornography books not allowed in school libraries?
It’s not “pornography”. Stop pushing lies.
It shows a man giving fellatio to another man. Is that no longer considered pornography?
No, that is most certainly NOT what it shows.
Stop lying.
Gender Queer shows 2 teenage males giving oral sex to each other. Go grab the book or just use Google.
Anonymous
12/26/2022 16:45
Subject: Re:Hannah Natanson at it again
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Her stories all have an angle from the far left, including this article. How about an article about the straight up pornography in Gender Queer? How would it compare to pornography books not allowed in school libraries?
It’s not “pornography”. Stop pushing lies.
It shows a man giving fellatio to another man. Is that no longer considered pornography?
No, that is most certainly NOT what it shows.
Stop lying.
Anonymous
12/26/2022 16:45
Subject: Re:Hannah Natanson at it again
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Her stories all have an angle from the far left, including this article. How about an article about the straight up pornography in Gender Queer? How would it compare to pornography books not allowed in school libraries?
It’s not “pornography”. Stop pushing lies.
So Jeff would let us post the picture here?
Jeff wouldn’t let us post an anatomically-correct illustration of genitalia. Just because it’s not appropriate for all audiences doesn’t mean it is “pornography”.
Anonymous
12/26/2022 16:36
Subject: Re:Hannah Natanson at it again
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Her stories all have an angle from the far left, including this article. How about an article about the straight up pornography in Gender Queer? How would it compare to pornography books not allowed in school libraries?
It’s not “pornography”. Stop pushing lies.
So Jeff would let us post the picture here?
Anonymous
12/25/2022 15:00
Subject: Re:Hannah Natanson at it again
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Her stories all have an angle from the far left, including this article. How about an article about the straight up pornography in Gender Queer? How would it compare to pornography books not allowed in school libraries?
It’s not “pornography”. Stop pushing lies.
So Jeff would let us post the picture here?
Anonymous
12/25/2022 12:44
Subject: Re:Hannah Natanson at it again
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Her stories all have an angle from the far left, including this article. How about an article about the straight up pornography in Gender Queer? How would it compare to pornography books not allowed in school libraries?
It’s not “pornography”. Stop pushing lies.
It shows a man giving fellatio to another man. Is that no longer considered pornography?
It’s ok because it’s illustrated, not an actual picture. That makes it artsy and “challenging.” LOL.
In all seriousness I don’t have a huge problem with HS age kids and up reading those kind of graphic novels, but come on - they shouldn’t be offered in school libraries. When I was in HS we had to get parental permission to watch Schindler’s List in history class as 15/16 year olds because it was R rated, and yes there were parents who didn’t allow it and those kids had to do another project for the week.
Anonymous
12/25/2022 10:45
Subject: Re:Hannah Natanson at it again
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Her stories all have an angle from the far left, including this article. How about an article about the straight up pornography in Gender Queer? How would it compare to pornography books not allowed in school libraries?
It’s not “pornography”. Stop pushing lies.
It shows a man giving fellatio to another man. Is that no longer considered pornography?
Anonymous
12/25/2022 01:43
Subject: Re:Hannah Natanson at it again
Lawn Boy isn’t appropriate. You don’t have to be a RWNJ to see that!
Anonymous
12/24/2022 22:30
Subject: Hannah Natanson at it again
She's awful, I can't believe she hasn't been fired with all of the downsizing yet - I wonder who she's connected to. Clearly mommy and daddy have some money and important friends because she's not there because she can write.
Anonymous
12/24/2022 22:29
Subject: Hannah Natanson at it again
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think she's a good writer.
Aww, that's sweet.
Even if you think she's a good writer she's a crappy reporter.
+1
She is not an opinion columnist but that is the bent she brings to her “reporting”.
Anonymous
12/24/2022 21:06
Subject: Re:Hannah Natanson at it again
Anonymous wrote:Her stories all have an angle from the far left, including this article. How about an article about the straight up pornography in Gender Queer? How would it compare to pornography books not allowed in school libraries?
It’s not “pornography”. Stop pushing lies.
Anonymous
12/24/2022 17:22
Subject: Hannah Natanson at it again
Anonymous wrote:I think she's a good writer.
Aww, that's sweet.
Even if you think she's a good writer she's a crappy reporter.